Prospects and Proposals Masayuki Yamauchi
III. The “Arc of Freedom and Prosperity” Revisited and Building a Sea Power Network——A Proposal
Nevertheless, and this is not limited to the Middle East, it is not necessarily the case that the international community is positive about such ideas as that of an “ethical foreign policy” or “a force for good” that were put forward by the Labour administration of Tony Blair in Britain, which came into office in 1997. It is not without reason that the international community is standing idly
by and watching the present situation unfold in Libya. Concerning this point, Dr. Hosoya emphasized that the flow of humanitarian intervention that had been progressing since the 1990s has become stagnant following the experiences of the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars. The financial constraints and individual interests of the major nations and the “excess involvement” of military forces stationed abroad, etc., have become the basis for turning international opinion cautious even with regard to the setting up of no-fly zones, while the Obama administration is hesitant to give support to Libya’s internal opposition forces by intervening militarily in the conflict. While the major nations are cautious about mounting military intervention on humanitarian grounds, the UN, which proclaims “human security” and the “responsibility to provide protection”, finds it difficult to neglect a humanitarian crisis. Japan in particular, as a positive advocate of “human security”, is suffering a serious dilemma caught between the need for humanitarian intervention in conflict areas and the significance of rescue on the one hand and the constraints on its ability to provide a military contribution on the other. In spite of this, when we think about the new international order, and particularly about the recovery of peace in the Middle East, we have to search for a way to build on a foundation that encompasses a greater sharing of values and standards than has been the case conventionally.
In this connection, the abovementioned view has something in common with the argument put forward by Prof. Ohno that Japan, which is subject to constraints on “the exercise of defense power”, should involve itself positively as a global civilian power in the process of constructing a new world order. Prof. Ohno has emphasized that development cooperation is “one of the few undertakings” in which Japan can make use of its own hands in support of the international community.
In order to realize this, Japan’s diplomacy has been envisioned in terms of the strategy called the
“arc of freedom and prosperity”, which is an attempt to share values and interests. It is regrettable that this strategy has somewhat lost its luster with the change of administration. According to the
“arc of freedom and prosperity” concept, there are nations that share the same values, namely, Japan at the eastern end of the Eurasian continent and the European nations at the western edge.
And between these two there are nations that have experienced rapid liberalization in Eastern Europe such as the three Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and nations in the Muslim world such as Turkey, which has declared itself secularist and democratic and has maintained a separation between religion and politics since the 1920s, proceeded with its own diplomacy, and become a model for democratization in the Middle East. Moving through India, the eastern part of
the arc takes in the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries, showing that an increasing number of Asian nations have adopted freedom and prosperity as matters of “common interest” and “common values” as well. The movements demanding freedom and the rule of law that are happening now in the Arab region beginning with Egypt should have eventually led to a connection with this “arc of freedom and prosperity”. This strategic concept had the purpose of prompting the nations and regions belonging to the arc to make efforts in search of a future of greater freedom and prosperity, while at the same time Japan was to cooperate with them in the role of a good escort runner.
For instance, as an aid to securing affluence within the “arc of freedom and prosperity”, Dr.
Suzuki pointed out that Japan should pay attention to the importance of so-called “de jure”
standards in its relationship with the global market. In this, with regard to the specifications and standards of new technologies, standards are set up by means of discussions conducted by international organizations and at international conferences, after which all nations carry out technological development based on those standards. This kind of joint undertaking is appropriate to the “arc of freedom and prosperity”, given its orientation toward liberal democracy.
In this context, it is suggestive that Dr. Miyagi, a member of this research group, listed Indonesia and Turkey as nations the future Japan of the 2030s should be focusing on. Both are regional powers that have achieved favorable economic growth in recent years and become members of the G20. Moreover, he proclaims that both are successfully achieving a balance between Islam and a stable democratic system of government. Partnerships with nations that possess such characteristics will significantly expand the breadth and potential of Japan’s diplomacy, and they are also the kind of nations that can serve as organic components in the “arc of freedom and prosperity”.
One method of realizing this goal is by means of dialogue and consultation. Another is to make full use of non-military means such as ODA, human resource cultivation, cultural exchanges, etc.
In order for Japan not to engage in leadership competition with China and Russia, but rather to give due consideration to important value senses such as freedom and prosperity, and also to conduct itself from the standpoint not of a destroyer of order but of a force for maintaining peace and stability in the international community, it should show freedom and prosperity to China and Russia as “common values” and “common interests”. For China, which recently surpassed Japan in terms of GDP, to continue developing, it is important that it becomes a future-oriented state by adopting the same values to which Japan ascribes. If such a vision could have been brought to life, and if the Japan-U.S. alliance had functioned properly, I am certain that the unnecessary friction and expansion of tensions Japan experienced with China and Russia last autumn could have been
avoided.
Moreover, the concept of a “sea power network” is also important. In the Pacific Ocean, in addition to Japan and the United States, this network would involve other important nations including the ASEAN members such as Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore, as well as Australia and India. The NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) member countries including the UK and France also have interests as sea powers. Through their joint efforts, these nations are protecting the freedom of the sea-lanes along which energy resources such as oil and natural gas are transported and conducting the necessary fight against piracy and terrorist activity in the seas adjacent to the Middle East. In this sense too, governments have to share freedom and prosperity with their own citizens by engaging in dialogue with ongoing democratization movements in order to prevent Yemen from becoming a second Somalia and to avert the establishment of an authority in Bahrain that refuses to engage in international cooperation. The sea route from the Strait of Hormuz via the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean to the Strait of Malacca is one of the world’s main marine arteries, as is the route connecting the Strait of Hormuz with the Bab-el-Mandeb, Red Sea and Suez Canal. Of course there is no need to stress the importance of preventing the transport and purchasing of weapons of mass destruction by sea and of tackling the problem of marine pollution.
Lastly, I would like to express my wish that China will participate in the “sea power network” and refrain from taking actions of the kind that have often encroached on Japan’s legitimate interests and from making unjustified claims on territory which is under the sovereignty of other nations.